Verizon on offense behind the scenes

Officially, telecom giant Verizon has no comment about turning over millions of customers’ call logs to the government.

But behind the scenes, the company is vetting requests from senior Capitol Hill aides and others, asking Obama administration officials for political cover — and relying on its lawyers to craft the company’s messaging.

Story Continued Below

Verizon circulated a company memo from general counsel Randy Milch Thursday morning that laid out its position, including that it would be legally obligated to respond to government requests like these and that it takes steps to protect customers’ private information.

The memo went out internally and then was sent to consultants to use as talking points.

“You may have seen stories in the news about a top secret order Verizon allegedly received to produce certain calling information to the U.S. Government,” Verizon’s Milch wrote. “We have no comment on the accuracy of The Guardian newspaper story or the documents referenced, but a few items in these stories are important. The alleged court order that The Guardian published on its website contains language that compels Verizon to respond, forbids Verizon from revealing the order’s existence and excludes from production the ‘content of any communication … or the name, address, or financial information of a subscriber or customer.’”

The memo also states that Verizon takes measures to protect customers’ privacy, but if the company “were to receive such an order, we would be required to comply.”

Using a general counsel to get a company’s position out is unusual. Typically, a company faced with such a public relations crisis would direct its army of consultants, third-party validators and others to go on offense. The legal approach highlights Verizon’s added difficulty of being under a court-ordered gag order.

Verizon has an enormous lobbying force with more than 30 firms reporting lobbying activity in 2013. The company spent $3.6 million on lobbying during the first quarter of the year.

For now, K-Streeters expect lawmakers to call hearings over the matter, though it’s unclear whether that would cause momentum for a change in the law.

“They can have hearings. It will be a repeat of all the hearings that were done six or eight years ago. Eventually, a lot of Democrats as well as Republicans supported this,” said one lobbyist who has worked on these issues.

Verizon’s quick response has more to do with its brand reputation with customers and inside the Beltway than liability, sources said.

Congress granted telecom companies aiding the government with these requests retroactive immunity after several civil liberties groups and others sued companies like AT&T and Verizon.

Still, outside groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation have begun looking at options of filing legal action against the government related to Verizon’s phone logs.

Cindy Cohn of the foundation said that she and her team are looking into whether the government is violating the Constitution or statutes.

“Nothing in the PATRIOT Act says that millions of innocent Americans can have their phone records turned over to the government,” Cohn said.

While lawsuits against Verizon might be unlikely, interest on Capitol Hill is intense.

Senior congressional aides have begun emailing consultants and in-house company officials, seeking more information. And outside lobbyists and consultants who have inquired have gotten “no comment” beyond Milch’s memo.

Sources familiar with Verizon said the company had reached out to Obama administration officials, asking for backup.

That political cover came quickly with a senior administration official defending the program, calling it a vital tool and saying that it has approval of all three branches of government.

“On its face, the order reprinted in the article does not allow the government to listen in on anyone’s telephone calls,” said the official, who requested anonymity. “The information acquired does not include the content of any communications or the name of any subscriber. It relates exclusively to metadata, such as a telephone number or the length of a call.”

Senior members of the Senate Intelligence Committee also downplayed the significance of the order, saying that phone calls have been monitored for years and that lawmakers are regularly briefed on the situation.